Previous Thread
Previous
Expand All
Collapse All
Ignore Author
Reply
>Question Oolan, you say you want it to be so everyone can get involved. There are people out there who can make better the store quality weapons and armor that aren't quite capped. They don't sell because people prefer to have the best. Changing the system won't really change anyone's mind. Why have average when the best isn't that expensive to begin with?
You're not listening to what they're saying. The plan is to have the simpler templates (we'll assume short swords for the purposes of this post) cappable with very few ranks, that way even noobish smiths will be producing capped items. I think the intended result is that the super high-end smiths won't bother making short swords because 1) they'll make more money making the items that require far more ranks to cap, and 2) making those short swords probably won't teach Smithing anymore, so they'll want to always make the most difficult items they can if they want to keep gaining ranks in Smithing.
The reason this works is that short swords will always be desirable to certain LE users (the ones who don't use katars), and therefore noobish smiths will always have a niche audience to cater to. Hypothetically, as said noob gains more ranks, he'll move on to cater to the scimitar crowd, then the broadsword crowd, then the bastard sword crowd. People will always need all those items, and moving up the ladder will keep said character mindlocking his Smithing skill all along the way.
Aveda's Field Guide- http://dr.aveda.googlepages.com
Heh, I'd say that guy talking about using medium blunt skill had the right idea. Lore primaries would still learn the lore half of smithing best, and we'd have and edge in the weapon driven aspect. Only I think it should use light blunt skill, pretty much only a barbarian would want to train that, as it's a more or less ineffective weapon, but I'd imagine you'd have to be fairly skilled with swinging around hammers to hit the blade right where you want it hmm? We'd still have an edge(or at least equal chance of capping) cause most lore primary guilded characters would suffer training a blunt skill in combat(and if they don't kudos to them) and light blunt is pretty much a punishing skill to train anyway(though not quite as bad as QS and SS). It would give those traders pause, "do I trade, beat critters, or beat metal?". We'd only have to beat critters and beat metal. Win for us, and win for those who are dedicated enough.
>>1. I firmly believe that the use of a weapon/armor needs to be included in the equation. Presently, mech lore accounts for 10% of your forging factor with the use component being 90%. Even a flip of the percentages would recognize the use aspect and make using the weapon/armor meaningful.
That hasn't been ruled out. It hasn't been fully and formally decided in either direction. All Ssra has said so far is you are better off assuming it won't to be on the safe side when concidering what skills to train.
>>2. There has been much discussion about how to reward exceptions smiths under the current system, the majority of which surrounds the "fairness" of such a system. I can not envision anything that will be fair about rewarding characters for hard work, so I do not believe that can be your focus. My opinion is obviously biased, but I believe there is merit to simply saying "These smiths have devoted so much time to the craft that they are entitled to this reward, regardless of the fairness to others."
Right, but what if I decide that Madigan doesn't make the cutoff? What if I say that Drevid hasn't been doing enough lately for me to feel he's a master smith today? Just using names of people that have posted. The point is, if I'm going to put out a reward of any sort, then I'm going to base it on something concrete that can be measured and tracked. This isn't a popularity contest, it isn't about who I like and who I don't like and quite frankly, I haven't a clue who the "top" paladin and barb smiths are. I know some of the names from times when I've been in the market myself. Yes, I've seen many post and I've heard names being dropped. But based upon what criteria should I be handing out rewards for the new system? This isn't about being fair to the average player that feels left out but instead is about potentially missing people that do deserve some recognition. If I can't offer something to everyone that deserves it then I'm going to hold off until I can.
>>3. I believe the system should be as complicated or more so than it is currently. The worst possible end state (IMO) would be (i) have xxx mech lore ranks, (ii) convert all ML to "metal smithing", (iii) earn a "mold" because you are 50th circle, (iv) buy pre-made mix at supply store and (v) pound capped item. The complexity of mixing distinquishes novice smiths from expert smiths IMO, and I think that aspect should remain.
Sure, I fully understand the desire. However, in a skill based game success and failure should only rarely come down to a question of how intelligent the player behind the keyboard is. I want a flexible and robust mixing system, but I will not deliberately seek to make it so complicated that it takes months and several spreadsheets to even begin to comprehend things. Also, to be honest the current amazingly complex system is the reason why you have weight cutoffs, fixes that later had to be coded in due to under dusting, over dusting, etc. Being complex simply for the sake of being complex should NEVER be a design goal. I'm very sorry for those of you that disagree, but that's my opinion on this. I will make things as robust as I can, and I'll keep as far away from the WoW, EQ, DAOC methods as I can, but I will not make it so that requiring require a special math degree just to be able to make use of the system. Besides, in all honesty right now I'm willing to bet that maybe 1/10th of the folks who are marketing their stuff have actually mastered the mixing system and the rest studied it somewhat but mostly just use the mixes they got off of someone else. Once you have the mix, nothing else matters right now because most of the players want the 34 stone scimitar (known mix), 590 stone HP whatever, etc. The real need for mixing knowledge is only on the very rare custom orders and those few who simply are trying to see what else they can pull off.
GM Oolan Jeel
"This island is made mainly of coal and surrounded by fish. Only an organizing genius could produce a shortage of coal and fish at the same time." Aneurin Bevan, May 1945, on World War II rationing and shortages in England.
That hasn't been ruled out. It hasn't been fully and formally decided in either direction. All Ssra has said so far is you are better off assuming it won't to be on the safe side when concidering what skills to train.
>>2. There has been much discussion about how to reward exceptions smiths under the current system, the majority of which surrounds the "fairness" of such a system. I can not envision anything that will be fair about rewarding characters for hard work, so I do not believe that can be your focus. My opinion is obviously biased, but I believe there is merit to simply saying "These smiths have devoted so much time to the craft that they are entitled to this reward, regardless of the fairness to others."
Right, but what if I decide that Madigan doesn't make the cutoff? What if I say that Drevid hasn't been doing enough lately for me to feel he's a master smith today? Just using names of people that have posted. The point is, if I'm going to put out a reward of any sort, then I'm going to base it on something concrete that can be measured and tracked. This isn't a popularity contest, it isn't about who I like and who I don't like and quite frankly, I haven't a clue who the "top" paladin and barb smiths are. I know some of the names from times when I've been in the market myself. Yes, I've seen many post and I've heard names being dropped. But based upon what criteria should I be handing out rewards for the new system? This isn't about being fair to the average player that feels left out but instead is about potentially missing people that do deserve some recognition. If I can't offer something to everyone that deserves it then I'm going to hold off until I can.
>>3. I believe the system should be as complicated or more so than it is currently. The worst possible end state (IMO) would be (i) have xxx mech lore ranks, (ii) convert all ML to "metal smithing", (iii) earn a "mold" because you are 50th circle, (iv) buy pre-made mix at supply store and (v) pound capped item. The complexity of mixing distinquishes novice smiths from expert smiths IMO, and I think that aspect should remain.
Sure, I fully understand the desire. However, in a skill based game success and failure should only rarely come down to a question of how intelligent the player behind the keyboard is. I want a flexible and robust mixing system, but I will not deliberately seek to make it so complicated that it takes months and several spreadsheets to even begin to comprehend things. Also, to be honest the current amazingly complex system is the reason why you have weight cutoffs, fixes that later had to be coded in due to under dusting, over dusting, etc. Being complex simply for the sake of being complex should NEVER be a design goal. I'm very sorry for those of you that disagree, but that's my opinion on this. I will make things as robust as I can, and I'll keep as far away from the WoW, EQ, DAOC methods as I can, but I will not make it so that requiring require a special math degree just to be able to make use of the system. Besides, in all honesty right now I'm willing to bet that maybe 1/10th of the folks who are marketing their stuff have actually mastered the mixing system and the rest studied it somewhat but mostly just use the mixes they got off of someone else. Once you have the mix, nothing else matters right now because most of the players want the 34 stone scimitar (known mix), 590 stone HP whatever, etc. The real need for mixing knowledge is only on the very rare custom orders and those few who simply are trying to see what else they can pull off.
GM Oolan Jeel
"This island is made mainly of coal and surrounded by fish. Only an organizing genius could produce a shortage of coal and fish at the same time." Aneurin Bevan, May 1945, on World War II rationing and shortages in England.
>>I meant could and not couldn't, and that's just faulty thinking. As forger's barely learn from what they make now, doesn't mean they would stop because they won't get get skills from it not if there's a market
Sure, because right now the actions in the forge aren't what determine advances in the skill but rather hunting is what does that so NOTHING teaches well in the forge. But with the new setup that'll be the only way to advance as a smith. Big difference there.
GM Oolan Jeel
"This island is made mainly of coal and surrounded by fish. Only an organizing genius could produce a shortage of coal and fish at the same time." Aneurin Bevan, May 1945, on World War II rationing and shortages in England.
Sure, because right now the actions in the forge aren't what determine advances in the skill but rather hunting is what does that so NOTHING teaches well in the forge. But with the new setup that'll be the only way to advance as a smith. Big difference there.
GM Oolan Jeel
"This island is made mainly of coal and surrounded by fish. Only an organizing genius could produce a shortage of coal and fish at the same time." Aneurin Bevan, May 1945, on World War II rationing and shortages in England.
>>But with the new setup that'll be the only way to advance as a smith. Big difference there.
Yep.
Lore Primaries by virtue of skillset placement will have the upperhand
a 50/50 split between weapon/armor skill and lore would be ideal
Denz
If you want to be okay with a weapon and use a bunch of magic too, be a Warrior Mage. If you want to own the world with your you weapon and take a good deal of what the world throws at you while laughing in the face of magic, be a Barbarian.
Yep.
Lore Primaries by virtue of skillset placement will have the upperhand
a 50/50 split between weapon/armor skill and lore would be ideal
Denz
If you want to be okay with a weapon and use a bunch of magic too, be a Warrior Mage. If you want to own the world with your you weapon and take a good deal of what the world throws at you while laughing in the face of magic, be a Barbarian.
>>Question Oolan, you say you want it to be so everyone can get involved. There are people out there who can make better the store quality weapons and armor that aren't quite capped. They don't sell because people prefer to have the best. Changing the system won't really change anyone's mind. Why have average when the best isn't that expensive to begin with? Forged weapon on average sell from 10-100pk with most being in the 10-30 plat range. Now you want to make the system so that people can't capped items quicker. Umm most trader's I know tend to sell more weapons and armor than anything else. Now they can make there own weapons or armor, in some cases both. Yes they can only specialize in one but then the get the other secondary. So let me think if I'm a trader and I can make and cap my own weapons or armor. Not only that but I can do it much faster and it's cheaper for me to make it myself. How does a paladin or barbarian compete?
And the trader doing that won't be running trade routes, nor will they be spending time in a gem shop selling pouches, nor will they be at the trader tables selling what they are making, at least not while they are making it...they'll have to pick one or the other to do within whatever time they actually have to play the game. Yes, it's possible a trader might decide to become the top smith and more power to them if they want to try. But a dedicated Paladin or Barbarian who is as dedicated to that aspect of the guild as so many have said they are should most certainly be able to keep pace, or else the trader isn't selling their own stuff on the tables and so is in the same position as any other Barb or Paladin and has to find someone else to market their stuff for them, which means they aren't getting the resale profit themselves either.
Yes a trader or a barbarian or a paladin can specialize in weapons with armor as secondary, but they won't gain enough technique slots to master all weapons alone, let alone weapons and armors and things are a LOT harder if you don't have the techniques. I'm going to do everything in my power to ensure that barbarians and paladins have every chance to compete as I code up this system. I'm also going to do my best to make sure that everyone has to put effort into it if they want to get anything out of it.
GM Oolan Jeel
"This island is made mainly of coal and surrounded by fish. Only an organizing genius could produce a shortage of coal and fish at the same time." Aneurin Bevan, May 1945, on World War II rationing and shortages in England.
And the trader doing that won't be running trade routes, nor will they be spending time in a gem shop selling pouches, nor will they be at the trader tables selling what they are making, at least not while they are making it...they'll have to pick one or the other to do within whatever time they actually have to play the game. Yes, it's possible a trader might decide to become the top smith and more power to them if they want to try. But a dedicated Paladin or Barbarian who is as dedicated to that aspect of the guild as so many have said they are should most certainly be able to keep pace, or else the trader isn't selling their own stuff on the tables and so is in the same position as any other Barb or Paladin and has to find someone else to market their stuff for them, which means they aren't getting the resale profit themselves either.
Yes a trader or a barbarian or a paladin can specialize in weapons with armor as secondary, but they won't gain enough technique slots to master all weapons alone, let alone weapons and armors and things are a LOT harder if you don't have the techniques. I'm going to do everything in my power to ensure that barbarians and paladins have every chance to compete as I code up this system. I'm also going to do my best to make sure that everyone has to put effort into it if they want to get anything out of it.
GM Oolan Jeel
"This island is made mainly of coal and surrounded by fish. Only an organizing genius could produce a shortage of coal and fish at the same time." Aneurin Bevan, May 1945, on World War II rationing and shortages in England.
Actually the trader can keep ahead quite easily. Say the trader's takes 3 hours to work in the forge, the barb or paladin has to take those 3 plus an extra 6 to keep pace. Which means the trader has those same 6 hours to sell pouches, run routes, and run tables. When that time is up he just heads back in the forge and will still out gain the barb or paladin. There is no you can honestly sit there and say that the trader can't master forging and keep with his guild or risk the barb or paladin passing him. To do so is a pipe dream.
there may be templates that you can only get by having certain weapon skill. for traders <weapon tertiary> that's gonna be extremely difficult. They are more likely to give paladins a run for their money, being armor secondary.
<<Because it's a gigantic can of worms. Eldritch, necrotic, squamous worms, writhing in a vile stew of coagulating ichor, crushed from the living gullets of a thousand infant puppies, ululating in wordless terror. - Lorz>>
<<Because it's a gigantic can of worms. Eldritch, necrotic, squamous worms, writhing in a vile stew of coagulating ichor, crushed from the living gullets of a thousand infant puppies, ululating in wordless terror. - Lorz>>
Here's another question. Do you plan to alter the way in which forges are made available? I.E. easy to get to free paladin and barbarians ones, everyone else pays for more obscure ones?
Magic's Death Caraamon Makdasi,
Gor'Tog Barbarian Extrordi...Well somewhat average
Hunta Talna Kortok, built by Gor'Togs, for Gor'Togs
http://www.angelfire.com/rpg2/caraamon/home.html
Magic's Death Caraamon Makdasi,
Gor'Tog Barbarian Extrordi...Well somewhat average
Hunta Talna Kortok, built by Gor'Togs, for Gor'Togs
http://www.angelfire.com/rpg2/caraamon/home.html
Thank you, the mixing system as it stands right now is messed up.
I doubt Navak is going to forge at all, but from what I understand...barbarians will most likely get access to "barbarian only" templates for forging anyway or will get certain templates for "free".
Just think about it now, who wants forged throwing daggers?
Now replace that with forged short swords.
Or cutlasses versus scimitars etc...
Having access to templates that don't suck, training certain skills and using templates that excel in X, is a huge part of forging now and I doubt that will be changing much.
However, I do hope that forged throwing daggers/sling ammo/HT/pikes/halberds/etc... will actually stand out in the new system as weapons people would want to use.
I am --- Navak
I doubt Navak is going to forge at all, but from what I understand...barbarians will most likely get access to "barbarian only" templates for forging anyway or will get certain templates for "free".
Just think about it now, who wants forged throwing daggers?
Now replace that with forged short swords.
Or cutlasses versus scimitars etc...
Having access to templates that don't suck, training certain skills and using templates that excel in X, is a huge part of forging now and I doubt that will be changing much.
However, I do hope that forged throwing daggers/sling ammo/HT/pikes/halberds/etc... will actually stand out in the new system as weapons people would want to use.
I am --- Navak
>However, I do hope that forged throwing daggers/sling ammo/HT/pikes/halberds/etc... will actually stand out in the new system as weapons people would want to use.
I really hope they update the weapon and armor templates to make different weapons and armor more viable.
The spark of truth can be very powerful in the methane filled bowels of ignorance.
I really hope they update the weapon and armor templates to make different weapons and armor more viable.
The spark of truth can be very powerful in the methane filled bowels of ignorance.
>>I really hope they update the weapon and armor templates to make different weapons and armor more viable.
So do I. But let me ask you an honest question. Let's say that to make the LE weapons consistant across the board, not perfectly identicle, but consistant so that different ones can fill different needs, thus making more templates viable. What are your thoughts on already existing weapons? How should everything in game now be handled along side these updates? Keep in mind that might mean a slight downtweak to a weapon that might currently be popular as it is the "ultimate" example of X weapon. To put it in concrete terms, right now the scimitar is pretty much the only ME slicing template anyone bothers with. To make a greater number of viable ME weapons will most certainly involve moving others up, but it also might mean that the scimitar's stats are adjusted so that it fits a more specific niche. Is that something you all are okay with and how would you recommend we handle existing weapons in such a situation?
PS. This is entirely a theoretical, 'what if' question. By all means offer up your personal thoughts. If you might disagree with a specific point, state your counter opinion. There is no need at all for any fighting or name calling at all in responding to this question as there is no wrong answer when I'm simply seeking opinions.
GM Oolan Jeel
"This island is made mainly of coal and surrounded by fish. Only an organizing genius could produce a shortage of coal and fish at the same time." Aneurin Bevan, May 1945, on World War II rationing and shortages in England.
So do I. But let me ask you an honest question. Let's say that to make the LE weapons consistant across the board, not perfectly identicle, but consistant so that different ones can fill different needs, thus making more templates viable. What are your thoughts on already existing weapons? How should everything in game now be handled along side these updates? Keep in mind that might mean a slight downtweak to a weapon that might currently be popular as it is the "ultimate" example of X weapon. To put it in concrete terms, right now the scimitar is pretty much the only ME slicing template anyone bothers with. To make a greater number of viable ME weapons will most certainly involve moving others up, but it also might mean that the scimitar's stats are adjusted so that it fits a more specific niche. Is that something you all are okay with and how would you recommend we handle existing weapons in such a situation?
PS. This is entirely a theoretical, 'what if' question. By all means offer up your personal thoughts. If you might disagree with a specific point, state your counter opinion. There is no need at all for any fighting or name calling at all in responding to this question as there is no wrong answer when I'm simply seeking opinions.
GM Oolan Jeel
"This island is made mainly of coal and surrounded by fish. Only an organizing genius could produce a shortage of coal and fish at the same time." Aneurin Bevan, May 1945, on World War II rationing and shortages in England.
>>GM Oolan
I'm hesitant on posting my suggestions here. Would not this be a better discussion for the Lore folders? It seems like a very important question--One that the entire population of DR should discuss, and not one that is particularly limited to Barbarians.
Or at least, I've always been curious on what you were going to do about the old forged weapons that currently exist.(Great Slice Scimitars and Great Puncture Sabres, hah..)
__
~Leilond, the Crazy Anime Ninja 1000-Macro Non-Artificial Bard
http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h307/ss1shadow/leicollagefinal.jpg
http://www.elanthipedia.com/wiki/Leilond
http://soundsoftime.bravehost.com/bard_planner_v2.xls
I'm hesitant on posting my suggestions here. Would not this be a better discussion for the Lore folders? It seems like a very important question--One that the entire population of DR should discuss, and not one that is particularly limited to Barbarians.
Or at least, I've always been curious on what you were going to do about the old forged weapons that currently exist.(Great Slice Scimitars and Great Puncture Sabres, hah..)
__
~Leilond, the Crazy Anime Ninja 1000-Macro Non-Artificial Bard
http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h307/ss1shadow/leicollagefinal.jpg
http://www.elanthipedia.com/wiki/Leilond
http://soundsoftime.bravehost.com/bard_planner_v2.xls
>>Is that something you all are okay with and how would you recommend we handle existing weapons in such a situation?
I'm all for it. I typically use a broadsword and have an altered bastie but I'd have no problem "weakening" them a little so that other HE weapons like longswords and nimshas get more loving. I've always, always wanted my character's main weapon to be a longsword but they never really compared to basties.
I don't think the actual changing of existing weapons would be much of a problem, since most people would probably adjust to get whichever best suits their character. The only problem I really see is for the people with altered and bonded weapons. While I would certainly have no problem with it, others might have. The only thing I can think of at the moment is to offer free alterations for those that already have altered weapons and want to switch? Of course, I don't know if that'd be an issue with GMs or not.
Vinjince
"There are five possible operations for any army. If you can fight, fight; if you cannot fight, defend; if you cannot defend, flee; if you cannot flee, surrender; if you cannot surrender, die."
- Sima Yi
I'm all for it. I typically use a broadsword and have an altered bastie but I'd have no problem "weakening" them a little so that other HE weapons like longswords and nimshas get more loving. I've always, always wanted my character's main weapon to be a longsword but they never really compared to basties.
I don't think the actual changing of existing weapons would be much of a problem, since most people would probably adjust to get whichever best suits their character. The only problem I really see is for the people with altered and bonded weapons. While I would certainly have no problem with it, others might have. The only thing I can think of at the moment is to offer free alterations for those that already have altered weapons and want to switch? Of course, I don't know if that'd be an issue with GMs or not.
Vinjince
"There are five possible operations for any army. If you can fight, fight; if you cannot fight, defend; if you cannot defend, flee; if you cannot flee, surrender; if you cannot surrender, die."
- Sima Yi
I'd like to see more templates of weapons period, even if they have the same stats/caps just with different names. That sounds kind of pointless, but from an RP standpoint I for example don't see why there can't be a cutlass and a scimitar that both have the same stats. Variety is the spice of life.
>>Keep in mind that might mean a slight downtweak to a weapon that might currently be popular as it is the "ultimate" example of X weapon. To put it in concrete terms, right now the scimitar is pretty much the only ME slicing template anyone bothers with. To make a greater number of viable ME weapons will most certainly involve moving others up, but it also might mean that the scimitar's stats are adjusted so that it fits a more specific niche. Is that something you all are okay with and how would you recommend we handle existing weapons in such a situation?
I don't see why a scimitar would need to take a hit. This is how I'd envision the weapon templates to work.
First you need to do away with the upper cap of 6 second round time. Bump it to 8-9 as a max for the heavier weapons. 6 would function fine as the upper end for ME and LE.
Then adjust the minimum round times. It is sad that I can swing my bastard sword as fast as my scimitar and the difference between my LE and my ME is negligible (1 second on some swings).
LE needs to be the faster option with better balance. ME needs to offer a bit more speed over HE/2HE and keep some balance. HE needs to adjust the opposite way and lean more towards power with a bit less balance and the heavy weapons need to just hit like a brick truck and offer poorer balance.
Right now some weapon templates work and some don't because they are so horribly off base. A katar with dismal balance is a death sentence to use unless you are under hunting or have a ton of agility and reflexes.
So what does this leave for LE? Well nothing really - short swords are alright if you want to go the puncture route but why use that when you can buy a really heavy, mod slice katar and eat through things.
Max Primary Stat (non rare metals)
LE -> Mod
ME -> Heavy
HE -> Great
2HE -> Severe
Then adding weight would possibly bump them up a notch especially for the HE/2HE since swinging a sharp 70 stone sword is going to cut through a lot of things like butter.
Aside from this just fix certain templates that are awful to bring them in line with more practical weapons. I'm looking at you blunts! Then, as you go along add templates so folks can actually make and buy HT/LTs that are useful.
I don't smith but I guarantee you if I could make throwing hammers like the one I currently use I'd be in the forge in a heartbeat.
Anyways these are just my rambling thoughts on what I'd like to see. Some of you will disagree. To each their own.
-Galren Moonskin
Tusfaov calmly says, "Excellent. The inner fire burns bright within your chest, Galren. You have achieved a new level of enlightenment."
!>You hear the distant echo of a savage Horde screaming in barbaric approval of your deeds.
I don't see why a scimitar would need to take a hit. This is how I'd envision the weapon templates to work.
First you need to do away with the upper cap of 6 second round time. Bump it to 8-9 as a max for the heavier weapons. 6 would function fine as the upper end for ME and LE.
Then adjust the minimum round times. It is sad that I can swing my bastard sword as fast as my scimitar and the difference between my LE and my ME is negligible (1 second on some swings).
LE needs to be the faster option with better balance. ME needs to offer a bit more speed over HE/2HE and keep some balance. HE needs to adjust the opposite way and lean more towards power with a bit less balance and the heavy weapons need to just hit like a brick truck and offer poorer balance.
Right now some weapon templates work and some don't because they are so horribly off base. A katar with dismal balance is a death sentence to use unless you are under hunting or have a ton of agility and reflexes.
So what does this leave for LE? Well nothing really - short swords are alright if you want to go the puncture route but why use that when you can buy a really heavy, mod slice katar and eat through things.
Max Primary Stat (non rare metals)
LE -> Mod
ME -> Heavy
HE -> Great
2HE -> Severe
Then adding weight would possibly bump them up a notch especially for the HE/2HE since swinging a sharp 70 stone sword is going to cut through a lot of things like butter.
Aside from this just fix certain templates that are awful to bring them in line with more practical weapons. I'm looking at you blunts! Then, as you go along add templates so folks can actually make and buy HT/LTs that are useful.
I don't smith but I guarantee you if I could make throwing hammers like the one I currently use I'd be in the forge in a heartbeat.
Anyways these are just my rambling thoughts on what I'd like to see. Some of you will disagree. To each their own.
-Galren Moonskin
Tusfaov calmly says, "Excellent. The inner fire burns bright within your chest, Galren. You have achieved a new level of enlightenment."
!>You hear the distant echo of a savage Horde screaming in barbaric approval of your deeds.
So are bone-crushing claymores and greatswords and two handed swords going the way of the dodo? How about severe impact morning stars and bone-crushing and devastating impact mattocks?
Of course I am totally against adjusting existing weapons that people have already paid for. Some people paid thousands of plats for glaes and kertig weapons. That would be terribly unfair to those people.
Drevid
http://www.phiiskeep.homestead.com/Barbarian.html
Cylons... why debugging matters.
Venic smiles as he sticks his copper bead in one nostril, covers the other one, and exhales forcefully, shooting the bead directly at Drevid!
Of course I am totally against adjusting existing weapons that people have already paid for. Some people paid thousands of plats for glaes and kertig weapons. That would be terribly unfair to those people.
Drevid
http://www.phiiskeep.homestead.com/Barbarian.html
Cylons... why debugging matters.
Venic smiles as he sticks his copper bead in one nostril, covers the other one, and exhales forcefully, shooting the bead directly at Drevid!
Thanks for the response Oolan. We have had a good running discussion on the topic and I hope you think I am being respectful in the manner that I post my opinions on the topic. Here are a few responses:
On all points except for mixing, I may not agree with your answer, but I believe you have given all sides due consideration. I respectfully believe that you have not stepped back from your gut reaction on mixing (probably because it caused so many bugs) to give the idea of retaining a complex system due consideration. Some thoughts as you kick around the idea:
<<I want a flexible and robust mixing system, but I will not deliberately seek to make it so complicated that it takes months and several spreadsheets to even begin to comprehend things.>>
Oolan, I respectfully disagree with this statement. For armor forging you need three (3) formulas. Once you know those three formulas anyone can do exactly what everyone else can do. After you know the three formulas, then it is simply trial and error. The three formulas are readily available and it is the first lesson I give to anyone that wants to spend some time in the forge with me.
<<Once you have the mix, nothing else matters right now because most of the players want the 34 stone scimitar (known mix), 590 stone HP whatever, etc. The real need for mixing knowledge is only on the very rare custom orders and those few who simply are trying to see what else they can pull off.>>
This may be true for weapon forging. It is not yet true for armor forging. That being said, there are some very simple mixes that anyone can cap with enough ranks (i.e. ranks always trump mixing skills). The beauty of the mixing system presently is that it gives very young smiths the POTENTIAL to cap things prior to their skills allowing them to do so with simple mixes.
As always, thanks for discussing this system.
Madigan
True heroism is remarkably sober, very undramatic. It is not the urge to surpass all others at whatever cost, but the urge to serve others at whatever cost.
Arthur Ashe
On all points except for mixing, I may not agree with your answer, but I believe you have given all sides due consideration. I respectfully believe that you have not stepped back from your gut reaction on mixing (probably because it caused so many bugs) to give the idea of retaining a complex system due consideration. Some thoughts as you kick around the idea:
<<I want a flexible and robust mixing system, but I will not deliberately seek to make it so complicated that it takes months and several spreadsheets to even begin to comprehend things.>>
Oolan, I respectfully disagree with this statement. For armor forging you need three (3) formulas. Once you know those three formulas anyone can do exactly what everyone else can do. After you know the three formulas, then it is simply trial and error. The three formulas are readily available and it is the first lesson I give to anyone that wants to spend some time in the forge with me.
<<Once you have the mix, nothing else matters right now because most of the players want the 34 stone scimitar (known mix), 590 stone HP whatever, etc. The real need for mixing knowledge is only on the very rare custom orders and those few who simply are trying to see what else they can pull off.>>
This may be true for weapon forging. It is not yet true for armor forging. That being said, there are some very simple mixes that anyone can cap with enough ranks (i.e. ranks always trump mixing skills). The beauty of the mixing system presently is that it gives very young smiths the POTENTIAL to cap things prior to their skills allowing them to do so with simple mixes.
As always, thanks for discussing this system.
Madigan
True heroism is remarkably sober, very undramatic. It is not the urge to surpass all others at whatever cost, but the urge to serve others at whatever cost.
Arthur Ashe
<<So what does this leave for LE? Well nothing really - short swords are alright if you want to go the puncture route but why use that when you can buy a really heavy, mod slice katar and eat through things.>>
for us clients that would pay many plats for a severe puncture backstabbing weapon... :-)
<<Because it's a gigantic can of worms. Eldritch, necrotic, squamous worms, writhing in a vile stew of coagulating ichor, crushed from the living gullets of a thousand infant puppies, ululating in wordless terror. - Lorz>>
for us clients that would pay many plats for a severe puncture backstabbing weapon... :-)
<<Because it's a gigantic can of worms. Eldritch, necrotic, squamous worms, writhing in a vile stew of coagulating ichor, crushed from the living gullets of a thousand infant puppies, ululating in wordless terror. - Lorz>>
>>First you need to do away with the upper cap of 6 second round time. Bump it to 8-9 as a max for the heavier weapons. 6 would function fine as the upper end for ME and LE.
I like the rest of your idea but 6 seconds should remain the roundtime cap. 9 seconds is just too long, especially for a true newbie.
I think capping LE's at 1 for all maneuvers, ME's at 1/2 and HEs or 2HEs at 2/3 works well.
*******
Prime: Malkien
Prime: (Necromancer Bob- coming to DR in '08!)
TF: Ganymede
I like the rest of your idea but 6 seconds should remain the roundtime cap. 9 seconds is just too long, especially for a true newbie.
I think capping LE's at 1 for all maneuvers, ME's at 1/2 and HEs or 2HEs at 2/3 works well.
*******
Prime: Malkien
Prime: (Necromancer Bob- coming to DR in '08!)
TF: Ganymede
>So do I. But let me ask you an honest question. Let's say that to make the LE weapons consistant across the board, not perfectly identicle, but consistant so that different ones can fill different needs, thus making more templates viable.
Many weapons are simply not viable due to their construction. Most LE, LB, SS, QS, pike, and halberd weapons are average strength or less. One or two parries and the weapon is gone.
Another inconsistency I see is between weapon weight and damage. A 62 stone halberd does about the same damage as a crossing broadsword at almost half the weight.
LE - Needs templates similar to the jambiya for slicing LE's and the jabbers need to have more strength suitability and better construction to make them more desirable.
ME and HE - Need better axe (battle axe and hand axe) templates with better construction, slice, and maybe a little more balance. HE needs a jabber.
Pike - Better construction, less weight, a bump up in slice damage, and any pike weapon above 40 stones should be pole ranged. Bring back a usable one handed pike such as the ngalio from Leth.
Halberd - Pretty much the same as pikes, better construction and less weight, maybe more power.
sidenote: I think it would also be helpful if weapon templates offered greater balance/suitability customization without caps. Many weapons are pretty nasty to use because of their dismal balance.
The spark of truth can be very powerful in the methane filled bowels of ignorance.
Many weapons are simply not viable due to their construction. Most LE, LB, SS, QS, pike, and halberd weapons are average strength or less. One or two parries and the weapon is gone.
Another inconsistency I see is between weapon weight and damage. A 62 stone halberd does about the same damage as a crossing broadsword at almost half the weight.
LE - Needs templates similar to the jambiya for slicing LE's and the jabbers need to have more strength suitability and better construction to make them more desirable.
ME and HE - Need better axe (battle axe and hand axe) templates with better construction, slice, and maybe a little more balance. HE needs a jabber.
Pike - Better construction, less weight, a bump up in slice damage, and any pike weapon above 40 stones should be pole ranged. Bring back a usable one handed pike such as the ngalio from Leth.
Halberd - Pretty much the same as pikes, better construction and less weight, maybe more power.
sidenote: I think it would also be helpful if weapon templates offered greater balance/suitability customization without caps. Many weapons are pretty nasty to use because of their dismal balance.
The spark of truth can be very powerful in the methane filled bowels of ignorance.
If you ask me, I say wipe everything and start new. Whether you plan to boost the laggers up, or bring the top down doesn't matter (for the purposes of selling) because the end result is that everything is "average." Why bring it down rather than boost it? Because then you have room for truely special weapons, like special metals, etc.
If you ask me, one of the major things that would help all weapons is the proposed (last time I'd heard) break from OF = damage. As of right now, anything with bad balance is automatically taking a back seat. Just the way it is. You gimp parry and attack, and attack determines damage. Who cares about suitability, it only boosts damage.
Either that or go ahead and make all weapons identical. Meh, at least then you could choose for RP.
Bitter? Who? ME?
Magic's Death Caraamon Makdasi,
Gor'Tog Barbarian Extrordi...Well somewhat average
Hunta Talna Kortok, built by Gor'Togs, for Gor'Togs
http://www.angelfire.com/rpg2/caraamon/home.html
If you ask me, one of the major things that would help all weapons is the proposed (last time I'd heard) break from OF = damage. As of right now, anything with bad balance is automatically taking a back seat. Just the way it is. You gimp parry and attack, and attack determines damage. Who cares about suitability, it only boosts damage.
Either that or go ahead and make all weapons identical. Meh, at least then you could choose for RP.
Bitter? Who? ME?
Magic's Death Caraamon Makdasi,
Gor'Tog Barbarian Extrordi...Well somewhat average
Hunta Talna Kortok, built by Gor'Togs, for Gor'Togs
http://www.angelfire.com/rpg2/caraamon/home.html
>>I don't see why other templates would have to get worse for others to get better. Just buff the things that are weaker.
I didn't say they had to. I was just asking a what if question. Putting forth a random thought to see what people thought.
GM Oolan Jeel
"This island is made mainly of coal and surrounded by fish. Only an organizing genius could produce a shortage of coal and fish at the same time." Aneurin Bevan, May 1945, on World War II rationing and shortages in England.
I didn't say they had to. I was just asking a what if question. Putting forth a random thought to see what people thought.
GM Oolan Jeel
"This island is made mainly of coal and surrounded by fish. Only an organizing genius could produce a shortage of coal and fish at the same time." Aneurin Bevan, May 1945, on World War II rationing and shortages in England.
The current combat system is one of the things that I think weakens template diversity and has driven people into the current molds.
Pole range should mean more than it does, and it should be possible to hold that engagement range better than what hangback currently offers.
Moves specific to longer ranged weapons should be available...push backs, bracing so if they charge they can impale themselves, tripping with the hafts, all sorts of stuff.
Right now...I don't understand the placement of low balance weapons at all within the combat system. Due to the way offense scales, the increased damage potential per hit (I don't believe it exists over time due to how decreased balance seems to screw over attacking and defending) is superfluous at best.
In fact even at Navak's level in combat, which is middle to low on the current scale of creatures, I find myself using crappier weapons since better weapons cost me experience.
I am --- Navak
Pole range should mean more than it does, and it should be possible to hold that engagement range better than what hangback currently offers.
Moves specific to longer ranged weapons should be available...push backs, bracing so if they charge they can impale themselves, tripping with the hafts, all sorts of stuff.
Right now...I don't understand the placement of low balance weapons at all within the combat system. Due to the way offense scales, the increased damage potential per hit (I don't believe it exists over time due to how decreased balance seems to screw over attacking and defending) is superfluous at best.
In fact even at Navak's level in combat, which is middle to low on the current scale of creatures, I find myself using crappier weapons since better weapons cost me experience.
I am --- Navak
Agree with Navak.
Template work would help a lot of weapons (axes, pikes, throwing weapons) but a lot of the problem with some weapons is system-related.
Player-made xbows and thrown weapons might help remedy the problem but I don't think these will ever be as attractive to most players as longbows.
Off the top of my head: engagement rewrite (focus on pole range please), the return of force of impact for crossbows and thrown weapons and blunts, more skill-based weapon feats.
I think throwing blades are awesome. Adding feats like that for slings and staves would help a lot.
A couple requests: staff slings with good construction (Ssra made them parry-friendly but most still have piss-poor construction which sort of defeats the purpose), axes with half-decent balance, good throwing weapon templates.
Being creative will help differentiate the weapon classes but I would also urge you not to shy away from a little vanilla coding if that will help keep some weapon templates from being worthless to players. I think that's the point Caraamon was trying to make (similarity is preferable to uselessness) and I agree. I'd rather have an axe that mimicked a sword template than a weapon that's weight and balance makes it all but useless. At least with the former I could choose to use an axe for rp reasons.
*******
Prime: Malkien
Prime: (Necromancer Bob- coming to DR in '08!)
TF: Ganymede
Template work would help a lot of weapons (axes, pikes, throwing weapons) but a lot of the problem with some weapons is system-related.
Player-made xbows and thrown weapons might help remedy the problem but I don't think these will ever be as attractive to most players as longbows.
Off the top of my head: engagement rewrite (focus on pole range please), the return of force of impact for crossbows and thrown weapons and blunts, more skill-based weapon feats.
I think throwing blades are awesome. Adding feats like that for slings and staves would help a lot.
A couple requests: staff slings with good construction (Ssra made them parry-friendly but most still have piss-poor construction which sort of defeats the purpose), axes with half-decent balance, good throwing weapon templates.
Being creative will help differentiate the weapon classes but I would also urge you not to shy away from a little vanilla coding if that will help keep some weapon templates from being worthless to players. I think that's the point Caraamon was trying to make (similarity is preferable to uselessness) and I agree. I'd rather have an axe that mimicked a sword template than a weapon that's weight and balance makes it all but useless. At least with the former I could choose to use an axe for rp reasons.
*******
Prime: Malkien
Prime: (Necromancer Bob- coming to DR in '08!)
TF: Ganymede
I wouldn't mind at all if we had multiple templates in each weapon class that were nearly identical, except for the name. I'd pay more money to use a war axe over a bastard sword, even if the damage ratings were very similar. If there is one template in a group that clearly outshines others, that is the one I will use, but I'd rather have the option to pick on looks instead of stats.
As others have said, don't nerf what we have to make the stuff like light blunt better. Just make light blunt better.
I think every single template should, at the top end of forging skill, be able to achieve at least low to mid range fair balance. I don't care if it makes sense or not, this is a case of playability >> than realism.
I think every single template should, at the top end of forging skill, be able to achieve at least low-end moderately strong construction. I don't care if it makes sense or not, this is a case of playability >> than realism.
With those caveats as acknowledgments to the realities of DR combat applicable to every template, choosing a weapon in a class will be more of an RP choice, and less of a "if you're not using a bastard sword, you're an idiot".
As others have mentioned, there should be a jabber and a slicer template and a basher in each applicable weapon class. There should also be jab/slicers, slice/bashers, and jab/bashers and a jab/slice/basher. That's a potential of 7 templates in each weapon class. The theoretical total damage output should be balance between the 7 templates. You can choose if you want to be versatile (2 or 3 damage types, for invasions) or a specialist (like when you hunt kartais).
Yes the above paragraph should apply to blunt weapons too. I'm training MB in the hope that one day I'll be able to buy a flanged mace and get some serious bashing done while still getting a good amount of slice in the deal.
Pole range weapons need more templates, but what will really make these guys shine is an engagement system rewrite coupled with a skill feats system that allows for strategic and contested combat range manipulation.
~Hanryu Ves'Shomis
Sword of House Calibanor, Ambassador of the Ilithi Court, Emerald Knight, Keeper of the CEC, ... still a Ranger
http://www.kynevon.info/CombatEquipmentCompendium.xls
As others have said, don't nerf what we have to make the stuff like light blunt better. Just make light blunt better.
I think every single template should, at the top end of forging skill, be able to achieve at least low to mid range fair balance. I don't care if it makes sense or not, this is a case of playability >> than realism.
I think every single template should, at the top end of forging skill, be able to achieve at least low-end moderately strong construction. I don't care if it makes sense or not, this is a case of playability >> than realism.
With those caveats as acknowledgments to the realities of DR combat applicable to every template, choosing a weapon in a class will be more of an RP choice, and less of a "if you're not using a bastard sword, you're an idiot".
As others have mentioned, there should be a jabber and a slicer template and a basher in each applicable weapon class. There should also be jab/slicers, slice/bashers, and jab/bashers and a jab/slice/basher. That's a potential of 7 templates in each weapon class. The theoretical total damage output should be balance between the 7 templates. You can choose if you want to be versatile (2 or 3 damage types, for invasions) or a specialist (like when you hunt kartais).
Yes the above paragraph should apply to blunt weapons too. I'm training MB in the hope that one day I'll be able to buy a flanged mace and get some serious bashing done while still getting a good amount of slice in the deal.
Pole range weapons need more templates, but what will really make these guys shine is an engagement system rewrite coupled with a skill feats system that allows for strategic and contested combat range manipulation.
~Hanryu Ves'Shomis
Sword of House Calibanor, Ambassador of the Ilithi Court, Emerald Knight, Keeper of the CEC, ... still a Ranger
http://www.kynevon.info/CombatEquipmentCompendium.xls
I see it a little differently.
I think that capped LE should have the best balance, and that capped Pike or Halberds should have the best suitedness, and it goes along a continuum with HE having the most in-between stats. I see each category encompassing a range of options on the curve, with each having some overlap with the category below or above, and I see each different template having a slightly different cap -- so a Katar might be more well balanced and less suited than a Stiletto or Ice Pick (or the other way around).
There shouldn't be enough of a difference that one weapon should come out a winner to everyone, but it should reflect back on stats, and someone with any kind of stat allotment should have success in finding something that works best for them -- more than the current idea that you should either get the heaviest or lightest (depending on weight) weapon.
Now, I think that there should be a few different options at each point along each curve, especially based on type, but there should be some difference. Perhaps you simply start with a generic template (sword, axe, blade, poker, etc) and then work that out to what you'd like to be, and from there, more templates could be applied depending on the stats and any racial/guild training as the forging process goes on. You might start with an axe, work on the specifics of the balance and suitedness as you go on, applying techniques taught by dwarves, and might end up with a Dwarven Waraxe or Dwarven Battleaxe based on the decisions you make.
I think that capped LE should have the best balance, and that capped Pike or Halberds should have the best suitedness, and it goes along a continuum with HE having the most in-between stats. I see each category encompassing a range of options on the curve, with each having some overlap with the category below or above, and I see each different template having a slightly different cap -- so a Katar might be more well balanced and less suited than a Stiletto or Ice Pick (or the other way around).
There shouldn't be enough of a difference that one weapon should come out a winner to everyone, but it should reflect back on stats, and someone with any kind of stat allotment should have success in finding something that works best for them -- more than the current idea that you should either get the heaviest or lightest (depending on weight) weapon.
Now, I think that there should be a few different options at each point along each curve, especially based on type, but there should be some difference. Perhaps you simply start with a generic template (sword, axe, blade, poker, etc) and then work that out to what you'd like to be, and from there, more templates could be applied depending on the stats and any racial/guild training as the forging process goes on. You might start with an axe, work on the specifics of the balance and suitedness as you go on, applying techniques taught by dwarves, and might end up with a Dwarven Waraxe or Dwarven Battleaxe based on the decisions you make.
I just want my Sephiroth-like longsword. Almost got one altered but I'll wait until the forging rewrite. :D
Vinjince
"There are five possible operations for any army. If you can fight, fight; if you cannot fight, defend; if you cannot defend, flee; if you cannot flee, surrender; if you cannot surrender, die."
- Sima Yi
Vinjince
"There are five possible operations for any army. If you can fight, fight; if you cannot fight, defend; if you cannot defend, flee; if you cannot flee, surrender; if you cannot surrender, die."
- Sima Yi
>I see it a little differently.
>I think that capped LE should have the best balance, and that capped Pike or Halberds should have the best suitedness, and it goes along a continuum with HE having the most in-between stats.
I think you were replying to my post, in which case, I agree. I don't ever expect to see a Incredibly balanced great sword, just like I don't expect to see a excellently suited carving knife, but I want "capped" weapons with dismal balance to be a thing of the past. I think between low end fair and high end Unbelievably balanced, there's enough range to stick everything from an LE to a Halberd.
I also expect it to be quite difficult to make a fairly balanced claymore at 80 stones. But since this system is supposed to scale from 0 to 2000 I think there's plenty of room for a legendary smith to make a weapon that's about 5 feet long, weighs 8 pounds, and can still be balanced enough to be an OK parry weapon. The parry fanatics will still pick a main-gauche that's increadibly balanced as their weapon of choice though.
~Hanryu Ves'Shomis
Sword of House Calibanor, Ambassador of the Ilithi Court, Emerald Knight, Keeper of the CEC, ... still a Ranger
http://www.kynevon.info/CombatEquipmentCompendium.xls
>I think that capped LE should have the best balance, and that capped Pike or Halberds should have the best suitedness, and it goes along a continuum with HE having the most in-between stats.
I think you were replying to my post, in which case, I agree. I don't ever expect to see a Incredibly balanced great sword, just like I don't expect to see a excellently suited carving knife, but I want "capped" weapons with dismal balance to be a thing of the past. I think between low end fair and high end Unbelievably balanced, there's enough range to stick everything from an LE to a Halberd.
I also expect it to be quite difficult to make a fairly balanced claymore at 80 stones. But since this system is supposed to scale from 0 to 2000 I think there's plenty of room for a legendary smith to make a weapon that's about 5 feet long, weighs 8 pounds, and can still be balanced enough to be an OK parry weapon. The parry fanatics will still pick a main-gauche that's increadibly balanced as their weapon of choice though.
~Hanryu Ves'Shomis
Sword of House Calibanor, Ambassador of the Ilithi Court, Emerald Knight, Keeper of the CEC, ... still a Ranger
http://www.kynevon.info/CombatEquipmentCompendium.xls
>>I just want my Sephiroth-like longsword. Almost got one altered but I'll wait until the forging rewrite. :D
Hahaha, awesome.
__
~Leilond, the Crazy Anime Ninja 1000-Macro Non-Artificial Bard
http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h307/ss1shadow/leicollagefinal.jpg
http://www.elanthipedia.com/wiki/Leilond
http://soundsoftime.bravehost.com/bard_planner_v2.xls
Hahaha, awesome.
__
~Leilond, the Crazy Anime Ninja 1000-Macro Non-Artificial Bard
http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h307/ss1shadow/leicollagefinal.jpg
http://www.elanthipedia.com/wiki/Leilond
http://soundsoftime.bravehost.com/bard_planner_v2.xls
I don't care if all weapons get wiped and reloaded if in the end things will be better balanced. However, I've no idea from a mathmatical/coding standpoint how you'd do it on all forged weapons in existance without some issues.
One idea would be to raise the statistics caps and add more intermediate levels. So 40 slice in the new system doesn't mean as much as 40 slice in the old system. Then new weapons would have more "room" to play with. It was done with the roleplay skill values a while back and maybe makes sense now. Some of the higher ranges like Severe and Bonecrushing are really big too, and might use some new intermediate values.
old system:
0 - none
1-9 poor
10-19 low
20-29 - fair
30-39 - moderate
40-49 - heavy
and so on...
new system:
0 - none
1-9 - dismal
10-19 - poor
20-29 - low
30-39 - fair
40-49 - decent
50-59 - moderate
60-69 - heavy
and so on...
Then just factor the damage calc down by whatever % increase was applied to the total stat range. Something to think about.
http://www.drplat.com - The DragonRealms Platinum Community Website. Be sure to vote DragonRealms as your #1 MUD!
One idea would be to raise the statistics caps and add more intermediate levels. So 40 slice in the new system doesn't mean as much as 40 slice in the old system. Then new weapons would have more "room" to play with. It was done with the roleplay skill values a while back and maybe makes sense now. Some of the higher ranges like Severe and Bonecrushing are really big too, and might use some new intermediate values.
old system:
0 - none
1-9 poor
10-19 low
20-29 - fair
30-39 - moderate
40-49 - heavy
and so on...
new system:
0 - none
1-9 - dismal
10-19 - poor
20-29 - low
30-39 - fair
40-49 - decent
50-59 - moderate
60-69 - heavy
and so on...
Then just factor the damage calc down by whatever % increase was applied to the total stat range. Something to think about.
http://www.drplat.com - The DragonRealms Platinum Community Website. Be sure to vote DragonRealms as your #1 MUD!
